In my opinion, the second speech was better because the speaker maintained good eye contact, and a clear structure which made it easy to understand. She seemed interested in the topic also.
Djibril (3rd speech) had a very nice accent. It was the first I heard about the subject, it was very interesting to learn how he grew. IT's very different than the usual moroccan. Very good eye contact too.
The most important thing that was respected in the three speeches is the selection of organizational pattern and following it perfectly. The speakers use a lot of skills we learned at class such as eye contact, intonation, posture, and especially the presence of transition moving from a point to another. Good job delivering the great content of the speech.
the three speeches were good , the speakers followed well the organizational patterns. but I do prefer the second speech , the speaker kept a good eye contact , her voice was good . I really enjoyed watching her speech .
The third speech was very good in terms of following a structure ( problem, cause, solution), also in terms of the attention grabber. However, it lacked credibility alongside the arguments given which make them less convincing.
Maria EZZIANI -SP21 COM 1301 07- The introduction was well-structered with the use of an attention grabber, establishing credibility, audience analysis questionnaire, and the speaker clearly stated her position and the plan of problem,causes,solutions that she used. For the body, the structure was clear using transitions from a point to the other, from the problem to its causes and to its solutions. Also, the speaker stated the different sources used explicitly. For the conclusion, the speaker ended by a quote and by a reflection that leaves an impact on the audience. Regarding the delivery, the speaker maintained a good posture all along the speech, she kept aye contact with her audience, spoke clearly, and looked confident. Moreover, she repected the time limit that she was allocated. A small thing to address, is the use of writing in the visuals, but averall it was a good job.
The second speaker had a good delivery. She maintained eye-contact throught the whole speech. However, although she had a good voice tone, she used a lot of uhs which was a little bit disturbing. As far as the content is concerned, it's very well sructured since she used a good attention grabber, referred to her audience-analysis questionnaire and also mentionned at the beginning of her speech that she will be using the problem-cause-solution order. Overall, the speaker showed that she was very interested in the topic and conviced us about her point of view by using strong arguments.
Hibat Allah Manar I think that the first speech is very good; the speaker used visuals, had a good intonation, posture, and maintained eye contact. He also stated his position clearly in his introduction besides, he used a good attention grabber.
Hibat Allah Manar I think that the first speech is very good; the speaker used visuals, had a good intonation, posture, and maintained eye contact. He also stated his position clearly in his introduction besides, he used a good attention grabber.
Hibat Allah Manar I think that the first speech is very good; the speaker used visuals, had a good intonation, posture, and maintained eye contact. He also stated his position clearly in his introduction besides, he used a good attention grabber.
Hibat Allah Manar I think that the first speech is very good; the speaker used visuals, had a good intonation, posture, and maintained eye contact. He also stated his position clearly in his introduction besides, he used a good attention grabber.
Manal Mayssan The second speech was well structured and followed a good outline. In the introduction, the speaker shared a story as an attention grabber, she established credibility and refered to the audience analysis questionnaire. In the body, she used visuals and different sources to back up her argments and make them more persuasive. However, the visuals used could have been better as some contained writing only. The speaker's delivery was very good as she maintained good posture and eye contat throughout the speech and looked confident from start to finish.
Souhail Marnaoui personally I preferred the 3rd speech, not only for its structure but also in terms of content, it is about a subject which I was not familiar with, the presenter respected all the instructions related to the speech (attention grabber, the use of visuals etc). he had a good posture and maintained a good eye contact, but the negative aspect is his voice which has remained monotonous throughout the speech. overall the speech was decent, good work!
NABIL HAMIDI - First, I think that the attention grabber was not that attractive because there is simply a displacement concerning the elements of the introduction. Framing it otherwise, the wrong elements (Questionnaire Analysis, Hook) were placed in the wrong place. -Second, the gap failures that you use just as "ahhh" are not sign of a bad delivery. But if you extend the music of it, you will fall in the mistake of disrupting the attention of your audience. In contrary, using time-cutters or time-disruptors like "coughing" is not suitable for a good presentation. I would rather change my trajectory, or ask rhetorical questions the time for me to get back my idea. -Third, your conclusion was as bad as your first introduction, and that would affect both the first impression and the last impression that the audience have on you. So people should be careful!
IKRAM EL MORTAJI. The three speeches were great, but I preferred more the third. It is easy to follow with him since the speech is well structured. However, so don’t think that he established credibility very well. Also the tone was not that good, but the posture and eye contact were great.
The second speech was very well structured and respected the time limit. The speaker maintained good eye contact and looked confident throughout the whole speech. The speaker used an example as an attention grabber. The speaker used evidence to back up her arguments which makes the speech even more persuasive. The speech is well structured and has strong arguments that can persuade the audience.
I really enjoyed listening to the first speech owing to many reasons. First of all, the delivery, he kept eye contact with his audience, good posture, he could easily grab the attention of his audience. The time of the delivery was also good and you don't get bored. Secondly, the structure, we can easily differentiate between the introduction, body and conclusion. He also used his audience analysis questionnaire in a good way and he used an attention grabber at the beginning. Moreover, he used a lot of statistics to keep up with his speech. Lastly, the speaker had strong arguments to support his speech and convince the audience.
Even though the first speaker had a very good speech, maintained eye contact and raised his voice, i prefer the second speech. she talked about a very interesting topic and she seemed very interested about prisoners' rights. she also was speaking as if it was a conversation so it was very nice to listen to.
Speech 1: His speech was very well organized and his topic was very interesting. He used an attention grabber and mentioned the audience analysis questionnaire. His visual aids were well selected too. However, his voice was monotone and he way went way over the allotted time (2 minutes over). All in all, it was a good speech, although it lacked a bit in delivery.
EL MEHDI EL BOUSTANI SP21 - Section 08 Speech3: The speech is very well structured, which makes it easier for the audience to follow. Also, the speaker had a good posture throughout the whole speech, he was also engaging the audience by maintaining a good eye contact. He also gave a hint about his organizational pattern at the level of the introduction (problem, cause, solution), and he included visuals in his speech. However, I think that it lacks credibility since the arguments are not convincing. Overall, a good speech with a good delivery. Well done!
In my opinion, the first speech is great; the speaker choosed an interesting topic, the introduction was well-structured; as the speaker stated his position clearly, used the audience analysis questionnaire, an attention grabber, establishing credibility… the speaker used visuals, kept eye contact with the audience, respected the time, his body language is good: he looks confident. In addition, the speech contains great arguments and the ideas were well structured and organized.
MANAL HABBARI The topic was very interesting, there was an attention grabber at the beginning which helped in making his speech interesting to the audience. His delivery was good, sometimes he was uncomfortable, but he was able to get rid of the stress, his posture was also good.
Chaima Nasroallah: In the second speech, the speaker had a well structered introdution, she used an attention graber, refered to the sources, and she mentionned her audience analysis quetionnair. Concerning the body, it was clear the pattern used is problem, cause, solution, and all the sources wew mentionned as well. For the delivery, it was good. She maintaned eye contact with everyone, and her voice tone was perfect.
For me it is an A+ introduction because the speaker did an attention grabber, she also refers to her audience analysis questioannaire, she established credibility, and finally she stated her position clearly and guided the audience about the organization of the speech. She respected the requirements of the persuasive speech and did great job to persuade the readers because she also included emotions in her speech as well as using strong arguments to defend her position!
As for the delivery, the speaker kept a good posture all along the speech. She maintained eye contact with the audience, she did not give her back to the audience to show them the visuals; she was professional! plus, she was confident and soke clearly.
as for the time, (5:45) was not enough. She should have added two sentences for example to respect the time limit.
Douae Kabelma section 08 Persuasive speech 1 The speaker's organizational pattern was a bit confusing (he revealed his thesis twice) He also used a lot of "uuh" to gather his thoughts, which quickly got distracting. However, the topic was pretty interesting, his posture was good, and he managed to keep good eye contact. Finally, he had good control over his speech's direction and visuals but he went over the time limit (7:07).
The speaker in the second speech was excellent because she maintained consistent eye contact, good posture, and a calm demeanor. The speech followed a good outline and had a simple and clear structure. The speaker drew attention with an example, backed up her points with facts and statistics from various sources, used visuals, stuck to the time limit, established credibility, and referred to to the audience analysis questionnaire.
(speech 2) The introduction of the speech included a story as an attention grabber. The speaker also established credibility and mentioned the result of her audience analysis questionnaire in percentages.In addition to that, she clearly stated that the points that she was going to address in the body.She also clearly stated her position. In the body, the speaker used examples and sources that were relevant to what she was saying; she also stated them clearly. Besides that, the body was clearly structured and the speaker used transition words/sentences like (Firstly, secondly and finally) which helped the audience keep up. The conclusion was very good as it restated her stand and left an impact on the audience. The speaker had good posture with no big movements that would distract the audience.Her tone was also good as it wasn't monotonous and helped the audience not get bored. So, overall, the delivery was good. The speaker also used good visuals, although they contained quite a bit of writing. It would've been preferable to use less writing. She seemed convinced of her stand and genuinely interested in the topic which made the speech interesting.
I believe that the first speech was very intersting. The topic was good and it was well-structered. I like the fact that he had used many visuals and that he mentionned the result of the question analysis questionnaire. The delievery was quite good. I think that he was not confident enough. It could be in my opinion better.
Inass BENJAMA Speech 1 The introduction of the speech was good. The position, organizational pattern were clearly stated and the speaker referred to his audience analysis questionnaire and established credibility. However, an effort could have been made to have a more attractive hook. Regarding the body, there were tranisitions between the different parts which were logically following each other. However, few references were made to outside sources. He used effective visuals to support his sayings and inserted blank slides so that the audience could focus on what he had to say. Overall, the delivery was good, he maintained eye contact with the whole room, he had good body language but his voice could have been a little bit less monotonous.
For me, the second speech was really interesting. Especially the introduction because the speaker grabbed the audience's attention by a nice attention graber( a story), referred to her audience analysis questionnaire, built credibility, and finally stated her stance clearly and directed the audience through the speech's structure.
The deliverer was also good at presenting the body since She followed the criteria of the persuasive speech and did an excellent job at persuading the audience since she used emotions, as well as solid arguments based on resources and examples to base off her topic and to support her position. Not forgeting that the speaker used some methods such the transition to make the speech seem much smoother and empty of holes. The speaker was good at maintaning an organisational pattern to make her speech seem organized, clear and easy to keep up with.
She finally finished by a nice conclusion where she kept her composure, and tried to leave a sense of responsibility towards the audience, and that to make them persuaded more by hey topic.
As for when it comes to the delivery, the speaker was great, since she did maintain an eye contact with audience, also she had a great posture. What i also noticed that her gestures were well-stuctured since she kept moving, and she didn't turn to explain the visuals she posted to explain her arguments. This only makes her appear as a great deliverer and showed so much credibility in her topic.
MOHAMED TAHA DAOUDI Speech 2. The second speech was persuasive. In the introduction, the speaker shred a personal story about her childhood, a story that is related to the topic of her speech. The speaker also gave a detailed audience analysis questionnaire along with presenting the plan or the structure of her persuasive speech. In the body of the speech, the speaker followed a problem/solution structure. She used statistics and she referred to studies from reliable institutions. The delivery of the speech was good overall, the posture was right, the speaker maintained eye contact with the audience throughout the speech, and the tone of her speech perfectly matched the topic of the speech. The speaker also used visuals; However, i don't find them to be powerful following the theme of the speech (prison).
Personally, I think that the first speech was well structured, the speaker got the audience attention, the topic was very interesting even if I'm not agree with him on some points. the delivery was good, i felt that he controlled the succession of his argument very well.
Speech 2: I found that the speech was well delivered. The speaker started with a good attention grabber, mentioned sources, referred to her audience analysis questionnaire and had a clearly stated position about the matter. The pattern used in her speech was very clear; problem cause solution and used strong arguments to develop her point along with some visuals. Her delivery was also very good, she kept a good posture, made eye contact with her audience and respected the time limit.
The second speech was delivered in a good way and was very well structured. She used an attention grabber in the form of questions that tell a story. She mentioned the audience analysis questionnaire and that she used the problem-cause-solution method in her speech. She clearly showed her position and there wasn't any confusion about it. Also, there were visuals that helped in proving her point. As a speaker, she spoke clearly, kept eye contact with her audience, and had a good posture.
The second speech was delivered in a good way and was very well structured. She used an attention grabber in the form of questions that tell a story. She mentioned the audience analysis questionnaire and that she used the problem-cause-solution method in her speech. She clearly showed her position and there wasn't any confusion about it. Also, there were visuals that helped in proving her point. As a speaker, she spoke clearly, kept eye contact with her audience, and had a good posture.
MARWA BAMOUSS Speech 1 The introduction is well structured. However, the speaker could have used a better attention grabber. He mentioned the audience analysis questionaire, which proves that his topic is good. Throughout the speech, the speaker made many pauses and kept looking for his words, which personally made it harder for me to follow. He kept making eye contacts with the audience, looking at all directions and not only one, which is a good thing. Besides, we can notice the the speech is more than 7min long, which exceeds the time limit. Overall, the topic was very interesting and the visuals used made it more engaging. However, the delievery could be improved.
I really enjoyed the second speech for many reasons. First of all, the introduction was good since she used a good attention grabber and she established credibility. In the body of the speech she gave some very interesting points and used visuals which is good. I also liked that had a good posture and she seemed very confident doing her presentation.
Souha Makboul For the first speech. The speaker had a good attention grabber and he presented his topic well as well as referring to his audience questionnaire. His ci matched the content of the speech. For the body. He used good transitions between paragraphs , his arguments were well constructed with proof to convince his audience. As for his presentation it was good he managed to keep eye contact with his audience.Overall, it was a well delivered speech.
In general, the three speeches are good; but I prefered the second one. In the second speech, the speaker had a well structered introdution, as she used an attention graber. In the body, she used a problem-solution method and mentionned the audience analysis quetionnaire. Furthermore, the delivery, it was good. She maintaned eye contact with everyone, her voice tone was excellent, and her english accent is perfect.
Ali Ouedghiri Saidi COM 1301 07 I found that the speech was well delivered,the speaker referred to his audience analysis questionnaire and established credibility. but his outline was confusing at first. he maintained consistent eye contact, good posture, the visual aids were a good plus to his speech.
In general, the three speeches are good but I prefer the second one. The speaker had a well structered introdution, she used an attention graber. The delivery in general was good. She maintaned eye contact with everyone and her voice tone was excellent.
Regarding persuasive speech #2 I liked the content and the idea, the way it is presented, and the visuals, I can't deny also that the attention grabber did its job and it wad excellent idea and brave to say, in the other hand, the posture wasn't good enough and the tongue really could got her into the monotony, overall the speech is very good and well structured, A range in my opinion
Section 4: second speech peer review : The persuasive speech had a strong start and a compelling ending, and it was organized nicely. In order to strengthen their point, the speaker employed powerful rhetorical techniques like repetition, emotional appeals, and logical reasoning. To further support the claim, the evidence may, however, have been more extensive and varied. To strengthen the argument, the speaker may have also mentioned probable objections and answered them. Overall, the speaker did a good job of delivering the speech, and he or she showed a great command of persuasive strategies, although it would have benefited from more research and arguments.
Aya ziane Section 11 The speech was engaging and demonstrated a clear structure, with an introduction that captured attention and a conclusion that left a lasting impression. The speaker utilized relatable examples and straightforward explanations to present the topic effectively. To elevate the impact, incorporating a broader range of supporting evidence or additional data would have strengthened the speech’s credibility. Moreover, addressing potential counterpoints or common misconceptions could have added depth to the argument. Overall, the speaker delivered a confident and well-prepared presentation, though it could benefit from further research and a more diverse range of supporting material.
Mohamed Réda Sabile What I liked: The speaker was very convincing and maintained good eye contact with the audience. The speech was good structurally: it had a good introduction, a detailed body, and, well, a thoughtful conclusion. The visuals supported the message, and the hook from the very beginning made this a presentation all ears and captivating. The speaker was very confident throughout the presentation; she used statistics to good effect. • Areas for Development: The speaker's delivery was so monotonic, which at times made it less interesting. The talk took longer than the time available, which may have made the audience less interested. On the whole, this is a well-structured speech that hits hard. It would have been better with more vocal dynamism and control of time.
The speaker in the second speech delivered an excellent presentation by maintaining consistent eye contact, demonstrating good posture, and exuding a calm demeanor. Her speech was well-organized, following a clear and simple outline. She engaged the audience with a compelling example, supported her arguments with facts and statistics from diverse sources, utilized visuals effectively, adhered to the time limit, established credibility, and thoughtfully incorporated insights from the audience analysis questionnaire.
The most notable aspect of the three speeches was the careful selection of an organizational pattern and following it seamlessly. The speakers demonstrated many skills we learned in class, such as eye contact, intonation, posture, and particularly the use of effective transitions when moving from one point to another. Great job delivering the content in such an engaging manner! The first speech stood out for its excellent use of visuals and strong delivery, making it enjoyable to watch. The speaker effectively used visuals, maintained good posture, and made consistent eye contact. Additionally, they employed a clear attention grabber and stated their position clearly in the introduction, which enhanced the overall impact of the speech. Well done!
Name: Mohamed Amine El Malki Section: 11 The most remarkable feature of the three speeches was the deliberate choice of an organizational structure and the seamless adherence to it. The speakers showcased various skills we discussed in class, including maintaining eye contact, using intonation effectively, demonstrating good posture, and especially incorporating smooth transitions between points. Well done on presenting the content in such an engaging way! The first speech particularly stood out due to its exceptional use of visuals and strong delivery, making it highly enjoyable to watch. The speaker skillfully integrated visuals, maintained proper posture, and established consistent eye contact. Furthermore, they opened with a compelling attention grabber and clearly stated their position in the introduction, which significantly enhanced the overall impact of the speech.
The second speech was impressive, especially the introduction. The speaker grabbed attention with a story, mentioned her audience analysis, built trust, and clearly shared her stance and plan for the speech.
In the main part, she did a great job using emotions, strong evidence, and examples to support her message. Smooth transitions made the speech flow well and easy to follow. Her conclusion was strong and encouraged the audience to feel responsible, making her message more convincing.
Her delivery was excellent. She kept eye contact, stood confidently, and used clear, meaningful gestures. She didn’t rely too much on visuals, which made her seem confident and credible.
The three speeches were impressive because they followed a clear structure and stayed on track. The speakers used skills we learned in class, like making eye contact, using good intonation, having strong posture, and especially making smooth transitions between points. Great work delivering the content!
One thought the first speech was exceptionally well delivered for a few reasons. The speaker's delivery skills were great, such as maintaining good eye contact with an excellent posture and confident self-image. The speech was properly timed. Each speech did not feel dragged or rushed. The audience members were engaged throughout, either individually or in groups. Introduction, body, and conclusion was presented clearly. It appeared that the speaker had performed a very good job regarding audience analysis, filled out his questionnaire well, had an excellent attention grabber to begin, established good credibility early on, supported points with visuals, statistics, and good argumentation for a persuasive speech. Generally speaking, this was a very clear speech: well-organized, in addition, key presentation skills such as transition and intonation were highly appropriate.
RIM GRIOU SECTION 12 -The first speech was excellent. The speaker effectively utilized visuals, displayed good intonation, maintained proper posture, and engaged the audience with consistent eye contact. He clearly expressed his stance right from the introduction and began with an interesting attention grabber.
-The second speech was well-organized and followed a clear outline. In the introduction, the speaker used a story as an attention-grabber, established her credibility, and referenced the audience analysis questionnaire. In the body, she incorporated visuals and various sources to support her arguments and enhance their persuasiveness. However, some visuals could have been improved, as they consisted only of text. The speaker's delivery was impressive; she maintained good posture, consistent eye contact, and exuded confidence throughout the speech.
Speech 2 stood out as particularly engaging and impactful. The introduction was especially effective because the speaker immediately captured the audience's attention with an engaging and relatable story. This storytelling approach served as a strong attention-grabber, making the audience interested from the very beginning. Additionally, the speaker demonstrated an excellent understanding of her audience by referencing their feedback from the audience analysis questionnaire. This personalized touch not only made the audience feel included but also showcased her preparedness. Furthermore, she built credibility early on by establishing her expertise and connection to the topic, which enhanced her authority. Finally, she clearly stated her position on the topic and provided a roadmap of the speech structure, ensuring the audience could easily follow her main points.
The speaker's delivery of the body of the speech was equally impressive. She adhered to the principles of a persuasive speech, effectively combining emotional appeals with logical arguments. By incorporating well-researched evidence, concrete examples, and credible sources, she was able to strengthen her position and convince the audience of her viewpoint. The speaker also skillfully used transitions between points, creating a smooth flow that made the speech cohesive and easy to follow. These transitions eliminated any sense of abruptness, ensuring the speech felt polished and complete. Her use of an organized structure further added to the clarity, making her arguments accessible and straightforward for the audience to understand.
The conclusion of the speech was another highlight. The speaker maintained her composure throughout and ended with a strong, impactful closing. Her conclusion not only summarized the main points effectively but also left the audience with a sense of responsibility and motivation to take action. By appealing to the audience's sense of duty, she reinforced her persuasive message, leaving a lasting impression.
When it comes to delivery, the speaker excelled in several areas. Her consistent eye contact with the audience conveyed confidence and engagement, ensuring that she connected with everyone in the room. She also maintained a confident and professional posture, which added to her overall credibility as a speaker. Her gestures were purposeful and well-coordinated, enhancing the delivery without appearing excessive or distracting. What stood out was her ability to use visuals effectively; she referred to them seamlessly without turning away from the audience or losing their attention. This demonstrated her thorough preparation and her ability to integrate supporting materials naturally into her speech.
Overall, the speaker's strong delivery, well-structured arguments, and persuasive techniques made her presentation exceptionally effective. She showed not only her skill as a public speaker but also her ability to engage, inform, and inspire her audience.
The third speech was very impressive because of how well it was organized and delivered. The speaker used smooth transitions, which made the speech flow nicely and easy to follow. They kept good eye contact with the audience, stood confidently with great posture, and used simple but effective gestures to keep everyone’s attention. What made the speech even better was the introduction. The speaker started with an interesting attention-grabber that pulled the audience in right away. Then, they clearly explained their position, so everyone understood the main idea of the speech from the start.
Malak Anouar Personally , I find the second speech more persuasive engaging and impactful since she has a good eye contact using a fluent English . Moreover , she clearly explained her position and outlined her main points, making the speech easy to follow. In the main part of the speech, the speaker was very persuasive. She used emotional and logical arguments, supported by strong evidence and examples. In conclusion , the speaker’s clear organization, confident delivery, and persuasive approach made her presentation more interesting .
The three speeches were truly impressive, mainly because of their clear and well-organized structure, which the speakers followed with ease. They showcased several skills we’ve discussed in class, like maintaining eye contact, using the right intonation, standing with confidence, and transitioning smoothly between points. These elements made their delivery both captivating and engaging. The first speech, in particular, stood out for its incredible use of visuals and confident presentation style. The speaker integrated visual aids seamlessly, held strong eye contact with the audience, and maintained excellent posture throughout. They started with a powerful attention-grabber that instantly drew everyone in and clearly articulated their position, making the speech impactful. On top of that, they referred to the audience analysis questionnaire, tying it into their content. In the body of their speech, transitions were smooth, their points were well-organized, and they backed their arguments with solid evidence. All of this came together to create a compelling and well-delivered presentation.
The first speech was the best. The speaker made good use of graphics, had good pitch in the voice, had a correct posture, and kept eye contact with the audience throughout the speech. He stated his opinions without any ambiguity as early as the introduction and used a good hook.
The second speech was easy to understand and had a good structure, which means it had introductions, arguments, and conclusions. In the introduction, the speaker began with an anecdote, introduced herself and her background, and mentioned the audience analysis questionnaire that was conducted earlier on the attendees. In the body, she provided pictures, several references, and various forms of tables to reinforce the arguments made, and make them more convincing. Nonetheless, there was possibility of some of the visuals to have been made more colorful, as some contained only texts. The speaker employed appropriate non-verbal communication; she stood tall, kept her gaze steady on the audience, and did not appear nervous at all.
1st speech was outstanding because of the great use of visuals and the confidence of the speaker. The speaker delivered the visual aids smoothly, had great eye contact, and stood tall and confident. They started with a great opening that caught everyone's attention and made their message crystal clear, which made the speech very effective. They also related their content to the audience analysis questionnaire, which was nice.
Transitions were smooth, and points were well-organized in the body of their speech, where the evidence used was strong to back up the delivered idea. All of which made their presentation clear, convincing, and well-delivered.
all the speeches were clear and well-organized. Speakers demonstrated several qualities, including keeping eye contact, utilizing appropriate tone, standing confidently, and flowing effectively between points. These qualities made their delivery intriguing and engaging. In the first speech,the speaker used visuals and had a confident delivery style. The speaker smoothly integrated visual aids, made strong eye contact with the audience, and maintained good posture throughout. Also in the introduction, the attention-grabber was lear and good enough, making the speech memorable. Furthermore, there is a reference to the audience analysis question.In addition to that the body was well organized
FIRST SPEECH Overall, the first speech was really good. It was well organized and structured ,with a clear position and good use of visuals to emphasize the message. The speaker is establishing rapport and connection with the audience by mentioning the questionnaire and by using good eye contact and confident body language. The transitions between points were smooth, and the arguments were well-structured and persuasive. The voice, however, could be little less monotonous, and timing was on slightly over (7:02). More references to sources outside the text would further enhance the content. Despite these minor points the speech was very engaging and the hook used at the beginning was good also
SECOND SPEECH the second speech was Very well structured and easy to follow. The speaker started with an interesting story to gather the audience attention, the introduction was clear and she referred to the audience questionnaire which connected the speaker with the audience. She supported her speech with visuals, references and examples which made her arguments persuasive. However, some visuals could have been more meaningful, as some were simply texts . She delivered it confidently and impressively. She maintained eye contact, good posture and spoke in fluent English all the way through the speech. The use of emotional and logical arguments, along with smooth transitions, made her points easy to understand and impactful. The conclusion tied everything together effectively, leaving a lasting impression on the audience. Overall, the second speech was persuasive, engaging, and well-delivered.
The first speech stood out as the best. It was well-organized, with smooth transitions and a strong hook that captured the audience’s attention early on. The speaker used visuals effectively, aligning them seamlessly with the message. Their confident posture, steady eye contact, and rapport with the audience—enhanced by referencing the audience analysis questionnaire—made the delivery engaging and impactful. The arguments were clear and persuasive, and the introduction stated the position unambiguously. However, the tone could have been less monotonous, and including more external references would have further strengthened the content. Despite these minor areas for improvement, the speech was highly effective and memorable.
The second speech was clear, well-structured, and easy to follow. The speaker started with an engaging anecdote and tied it to the audience analysis questionnaire, creating a strong connection with the listeners. Visual aids, references, and examples supported the arguments effectively, although some visuals could have been more dynamic and colorful. The speaker’s confident delivery, fluent English, and appropriate non-verbal communication, including good posture and steady eye contact, made the speech impressive. Emotional and logical appeals were skillfully used, and the smooth transitions between points added to the clarity and impact. The conclusion was strong, leaving a lasting impression on the audience. Overall, it was a persuasive and well-delivered presentation.
Djibril's speech was interesting, with a nice accent and good eye contact. But I think the second speaker was better. She used simple language, had clear ideas, and looked interested in the topic. Both were good, but the second was easier to follow.
The second speech was well-organized and followed a clear outline. The introduction effectively captured attention with a story, established the speaker's credibility, and referenced the audience analysis questionnaire. In the body, the speaker incorporated visuals and multiple sources to support her arguments and enhance their persuasiveness. However, some visuals could have been improved, as they primarily consisted of text. The delivery was impressive, with the speaker maintaining excellent posture, strong eye contact, and a confident position throughout the presentation.
First Speech: The first speech was the best. It was well-organized, with clear transitions and a strong opening that grabbed the audience’s attention right away. The speaker used visuals effectively, matching them perfectly with their message. They had a confident posture, steady eye contact, and built a connection with the audience by using insights from the audience analysis questionnaire. Their arguments were clear, and the introduction clearly stated their main point. However, the speaker’s tone could have been more lively, and adding more external sources would have made the content stronger. Despite these small improvements, the speech was engaging and memorable.
Second Speech: The second speech was clear, well-organized, and easy to follow. The speaker started with a relatable story and linked it to the audience analysis questionnaire, which helped connect with the listeners. Visual aids and examples supported the arguments, though some visuals could have been more colorful and engaging. The speaker’s confident delivery, fluent English, and good body language—like steady eye contact and good posture—made the speech impressive. They used both emotional and logical points effectively, and smooth transitions helped make the speech impactful. The conclusion was strong and left a lasting impression. Overall, it was a persuasive and well-presented speech.
meryem akessabe section 10 .The first speech was the best. It was well-organized with smooth transitions and a strong opening that grabbed the audience’s attention right away. The speaker used visuals well, matching them perfectly with the message. They had a confident posture, made steady eye contact, and connected with the audience by referring to the audience questionnaire. The arguments were clear and convincing, and the introduction clearly explained the speaker’s position. However, the speaker’s tone was a bit flat, and adding more outside references could have made the speech even stronger. Overall, it was a very effective and memorable speech, with only a few small areas for improvement. .The second speech was good and there was readability of the structure of the speech. The speaker asked questions to capture the audience’s attention, then he narrated an instance. She informed the audience of the usage of the audience questionnaire, the method which they used was the problem-cause-solution method. About her message, there could be no doubt: her position was stated with great clarity. She also employed figures and graphics to help get her points across. As a speaker, she enunciated her words, looked at the audience, and sat/stand, or moved in a proper posture. .The third speech was organized according to the problem-cause-solution plan and had an acceptable and engaging opening statement. I personally liked the fact that the speaker has chosen his topic, as it was the first time I heard about it. I liked that he could explain about his upbringing and how he was raised, and it felt like he had a pretty nontraditional Moroccan upbringing. He had a proper British English dialect, a clean diction, and was able to look at the audience most of the time. I found that the speech is not credible enough because numerous arguments brought into speech are rather weak and are supported by insufficient evidence. This speech could have benefited from more basic reliable fact(s) added/referenced in order to support it. Regardless of this, ease of delivery and the topic chosen made it fun to listen to the particular broadcast.
-The first speech was very good, organized from a structural point of view and the main idea of the speech was stated very good at the beginning. The speaker kept his back straight, meet our eyes, and interact with the audience often sufficiently. Overall, visuals were used easily and effectively within this message. It was useful for the speaker to establish the relation with the audience by using the data from the audience analysis questionnaire, while their reasons where well-reasoned and convincing. As much as it could have been a more dynamic tone, incorporating more outside references would have benefited the speech further, still, it was very captivating and quite inspiring in general. - In the second speech, every point that was made was comprehensible and easy to follow. The speaker began by telling a personal story, and it not only meant that everyone in the audience was listening and engaged but was also important for gaining their attention. She incorporated good visuals and she supported all her arguments with facts and statistics However some visuals could be colored and more related to the subject matter. The speaker was very prepared and poised in her speech, she had a good posture and was looking at the audiance most of the time. I think the transitions between the arguments were nicely done, and the closing was powerful. - The third speech was well-organized, following a problem-cause-solution structure, and had an engaging opening. he speaker used smooth transitions, which made the speech flow nicely and easy to follow. However, I felt the speech lacked some credibility, as several arguments were weak and not supported by enough evidence. But in general the speaker's delivery was smooth, and the topic was enjoyable to listen to.
The first speaker established credibility and had a good posture and eye contact with the audience. He used visuals to elaborate more on his topic which is good. The second speech was well-structured and easy to follow. The speaker began with an engaging story that successfully captured the audience's attention. The introduction was clear, and she referenced the audience questionnaire, creating a strong connection with her listeners. She supported her speech with visuals, references, and examples, making her arguments compelling.
Speech 1: This speech was strong in terms of delivery. The speaker maintained eye contact in the whole presentation with the audience and had good vocal volume. He used visual aids in a good way to support his arguments, and at the same time he kept a good posture throughout. While the content was well researched and included statistics and graphs, the speech is too long (7:02 minutes). If this speech is from your class, it surpasses the time limit of 6 minutes. Also, the second thing that I didn't like is that the speaker used too many filler words like "mm."
Speech 2: It was well-structured and engaging but not like the first one, employing a conversational style and a clear problem-cause-solution structure that made the content accessible for any person. The presentation began with a personal story that is the best attention-grabber if it is done in a good way, and throughout the speech, the speaker consistently referenced many credible sources. The speaker, like the first presentation, did use many "gap fillers" more than the first speech, such as “uhm” and "uh." Although the visual aids enhanced understanding, the slides contained too much text, which could distract from the speaker, and it is a bad practice, especially in public speaking class. But what I really did like or feel was that the speaker is passionate about the topic of prisoners' rights, so it increased the speech's persuasiveness, which resulted in an exceptional speech.
The second speech stood out because the speaker's conversational style, fluid language, strong eye contact, and clear structure made it engaging and easy to follow, while her genuine interest in the topic added authenticity and connection.
The second speech was structured effectively and followed a clear outline. The introduction successfully grabbed attention with a story, built the speaker’s credibility, and referenced the audience analysis questionnaire. In the body, the speaker used visuals and multiple sources to strengthen her arguments and make them more convincing. However, some visuals could have been better, as they were mostly text-based. The delivery was outstanding, with the speaker demonstrating excellent posture, maintaining strong eye contact, and presenting with confidence throughout.
Speech 1 : The speaker's speech was well put together, and the topic was really engaging. He started with a good attention-grabber and even talked about the audience analysis. His visuals worked well with his message. On the flip side, his voice was pretty monotone, which made it less exciting, and he went over the time by a couple of minutes.
Speech 2 : The speaker started off with a story that really grabbed everyone's attention. She made sure to show she knew her stuff and even shared some percentages from a questionnaire she gave the audience. On top of that, she laid out what she'd be talking about and made her stance super clear. In the main part of the speech, she used examples and sources that made sense and backed up her points. The speech was well organized, and she used transitions like "firstly," "secondly," and "finally," so it was easy to follow.Her ending was strong she repeated her main point and left the audience with something to think about. Her delivery was great! She stood confidently without moving too much, and her tone was lively enough to keep people interested.The visuals she used were helpful, but they had a bit too much writing. Cutting down on the text would've made them better. Siham Bouzeriouh 147828 , (section 11)
Mohammed reda Chaali Speech 1 :has a well-structured introduction, though a stronger attention grabber could have been used. The mention of the audience analysis questionnaire highlighted the relevance of the topic. However, the speaker frequently paused and searched for words, which made it harder to follow. On the positive side, the speaker maintained good eye contact, addressing the entire audience rather than focusing on just one direction. Unfortunately, the speech exceeded the time limit, lasting over 7 minutes. Overall, the topic was engaging, and the visuals enhanced the presentation, but the delivery needs improvement.
The first speech ; A good topic presented by the speaker , including the use of visuals, establishing credibility (research has been done) and the audience analysis questionnaire has also been mentioned. In terms of the speaker delivery; eye contact was maintained throughout the speech. However he didn't use much the conversational style as he maintained a monotone voice and used a lot of gap fillers. But overall, Good speech.
I believe the first speech was excellent. The speaker selected a captivating topic, and the introduction was well-organized, with a clear stance on the subject. The use of an audience analysis questionnaire, along with an engaging opening and effective credibility building, contributed to the overall impact. The speaker effectively incorporated visuals, and maintained eye contact. His body language was confident, adding to the delivery. Moreover, the speech presented strong arguments, and the ideas flowed logically and coherently.
The speech of the second speaker was very strong, as She kept eye contact during the entire speech. Her tone was good, however she used verbal pauses like uh many times, which was a little disturbing. As she started with an effective attention graber, refered to the opinion of her audience ,and clarified the fact that she will be using the problem cause solution order, the content of the speech was extremely well structured. Overall, the speaker demonstrated her deep interest and investment in the topic and used strong and logical arguments to persuade us.
Amal Jebbouri, COM1301 10 In my opinion, I like the three speeches. The first one was outstanding, because the speaker kept a good eye contact with the audience while using a good introduction as he used the attention grabber and he talked about the audience analysis which made his speech very persuasive. The second speech was very effective, clearly outlined, easy to follow, and hence appealing. The introduction caught attention by the personal story told, established the speaker's credibility, and referred to the questionnaire over audience analysis. In the speech, the speaker supported her arguments with visuals and used multiple sources to make the facts and statistics sound more convincing. This could have been even more effective if the color or content of the visuals were not merely words but more related to the subject matter. The delivery was great; considering her posture, eye-to-eye contact, and confidence, it was brilliant in keeping the audience tuned in. Transitions between arguments were smooth, and the closing was powerful. Her tone was good, though the deep interest in the subject was apparent; there were some verbal pauses like "uh," which slightly distracted from her speech. She had prepared well, argued logically, and had a clear problem-cause-solution structure that made her speech persuasive and effective.
The first speech and the chosen topic were very interesting; in addition, to the slides. But, he was a bit anxious which was reflected on his body language and by using many gap fillers. The second speech was good as well with a good tone levels and delivery
The third speech had a strong structure, making it easy to follow. The speaker clearly outlined the problem, its causes, and the proposed solution, which helped guide the audience through the message. The opening was engaging and immediately grabbed attention, setting a positive tone for the rest of the speech.
However, the main drawback was that some of the arguments lacked sufficient evidence. While the ideas were interesting, they weren't always backed up by enough facts or data to make them fully convincing. Adding more solid evidence or real-world examples would have strengthened the speech and made the points more credible.
In terms of delivery, the speaker did a good job of maintaining a steady pace and keeping the audience engaged. However, the tone of the voice was a bit flat at times, which made parts of the speech feel less dynamic. Varying the tone and adding more emphasis in certain places could have helped bring more energy and engagement to the speech.
Sarah Chermat 146487: I really liked the second speaker's speech. -The speaker has a good tone and we can hear her clearly. -She maintained eye contact with the audience. -She didn’t use notes. -She had a nice hook: a personal story. -She introduced her topic smoothly. -She established credibility by saying that she conducted research. -She used visuals throughout the speech. -She mentioned the results of the survey she conducted. -She mentioned her organizational pattern in the introduction. -She used transitions: First, let’s start by…, second…., Finally… -She discussed each point mentioned in the introduction clearly. And gave good arguments to support her statements. -She used statistics, studies, and scientific facts. -She mentioned sources: Michigan law school…. -She used a quote in the conclusion and commented on it.
Lina Fares COM130112 The first speech was well-structured and engaging, with clear organization (problem, cause, solution), good posture, eye contact, and visuals. However, the arguments lacked credibility and were unconvincing, though overall, the delivery was solid.
The second speech was confident and persuasive, with strong eye contact, an example as an attention grabber, and evidence-backed arguments. It stayed within the time limit and effectively captured the audience's attention.
Both speeches had clear structure and good delivery, but the second stood out for its strong arguments and persuasiveness, while the first was enjoyable but less convincing.
Speech 2 stood out as a compelling and well-executed presentation. The introduction was particularly effective, with the speaker captivating the audience right away through a relatable personal story. This narrative approach not only engaged listeners but also created a strong emotional connection, setting the stage for the rest of the speech. The speaker further established credibility and demonstrated an excellent understanding of her audience by referencing feedback from the audience analysis questionnaire. This personalized touch showcased her preparation and helped establish a rapport with her listeners. Additionally, she clearly outlined her position and provided a clear structure, making it easy for the audience to follow along.The body of the speech was equally impressive. The speaker used a well-rounded combination of emotional and logical appeals, supported by credible evidence and concrete examples. Transitions between points were smooth, allowing the ideas to flow naturally and making the content cohesive and engaging. Her structured approach ensured that the audience remained focused and connected to the message.The conclusion tied everything together seamlessly. The speaker ended on a powerful note, summarizing her main points effectively while leaving the audience with a thought-provoking takeaway.In terms of delivery, the speaker demonstrated confidence and professionalism. Her consistent eye contact created a sense of connection with the audience, while her confident posture and purposeful gestures enhanced her credibility. The visuals could have been slightly more dynamic or visually striking to elevate the overall presentation further.Overall, Speech 2 was a standout performance. With its engaging introduction, persuasive arguments, and polished delivery, the speaker successfully informed and inspired her audience.
Speech 1 demonstrated a solid foundation, with the speaker showcasing strong delivery skills and a clear structure. The introduction effectively captured the audience’s attention, and the speaker skillfully incorporated data from the audience analysis questionnaire to establish credibility. His use of visuals was seamless, complementing the content and enhancing understanding. Additionally, the speaker maintained good posture and consistent eye contact, projecting confidence and engaging the audience throughout.
The speech was well-organized and supported by relevant statistics and visuals, making the arguments convincing and easy to follow. The speaker’s content was engaging, and the topic was both well-researched and relatable. However, a few areas left room for improvement. The delivery, while clear, lacked variation in tone. A more dynamic vocal expression could have added energy and kept the audience more engaged. Additionally, the frequent use of filler words detracted slightly from the overall polish of the presentation.
Another notable issue was the speech’s length. At over seven minutes, it exceeded the class time limit of six minutes, which may have affected its pacing and impact. Refining the content to fit the allocated time would have made the speech more focused and impactful.
Overall, Speech 1 was a compelling and informative presentation, strengthened by its structure, visuals, and audience connection. With more attention to vocal variety and adherence to time constraints, it could have been even more engaging and effective.
I personally like all three speeches. The first one was really amazing since the speaker kept a good eye contact with the audience. He also had a great introduction where he used an attention grabber, mentioned the audience analysis which made his speech more credible and persuasive.
The second speech was clear, well outlined, and appealing. There was a strong attention grabber where the speaker used a personal story that established credibility. He also referred to the audience analysis. The speaker also had strong arguments supported by visuals and multiple sources making her argument more convincing and credible. Additionally, the delivery was great, I didn't feel bored. Also, the transitions between each argument were very smooth. Overall, the speech was well prepared, well argued and well presented.
The first one followed the problem-cause-solution, well structured. About the delivery, good tone, posture, eye contact and good visuals. the speaker established creadibility with the audience analysis and, the used sources. It was a dynamic speech and convincing
The second speech had a good structure. About the introduction i found very interesting the shorts story as attention grabber. The speaker established creadibility and mentioned the questionaire.Visuals were used for the speech (some had text) and the arguments were based on the used resources. Good delivery(posture and eye contact). It was a dynamic speech.
The most important thing that was respected in the speeches is the selection of organizational pattern and following it perfectly. The speakers use a lot of skills we learned at class such as eye contact, intonation, posture, and especially the presence of transition moving from a point to another. Good job delivering the great content of the speech.
The first speech was well structured. We could easily follow the speaker throughout the speech. He also used visuals which helped us understand the topic and his position. The speaker demonstrated clear understanding of the topic. His posture was also very good, his eye contact was great, and his intonation and voice were adequate.
The second speech was also very good. Her visuals were nice, which helped us follow the speaker throughout the speech. Her intonation and voice were great too. Her posture was good too, it showed her confidence. Finally, she kept eye contact during the whole speech.
The first speech is structured well as the speaker followed problem-cause-solution. The topic is very interesting. The introduction clearly states the main topic. The speaker used visuals, had good posture, and maintained eye contact. He had a good attention grabber and made credibility by mentioning the audience analysis questionnaire. The body is well strcutured with each point being explained well. However, the speaker's tone could've been better and more dynamic. Also, he could've avoided using filler words. Overall, the speech is very good, and I believe it does a good job at persuading listeners.
The second speech was also well-organized and had a very good outline. In her introduction, the speaker had an attention-grabbing story, credibility, and a reference to the questionnaire for audience analysis. Her body used visuals and sources to back up her argument to make them more convincing. In some, visuals used were not appropriate because there was only writing on them. She gave her speech quite well: she had good posture, good eye contact, and since the beginning, she had looked confident.
Hiba Ezzahir (2nd speech) - The speaker had a clear and engaging tone, making it easy for the audience to hear her. - She maintained good eye contact throughout her speech and spoke without relying on notes. - Her introduction included a personal story, which served as an effective hook. - She smoothly introduced her topic and established credibility by mentioning her research. - Visual aids were used consistently throughout the presentation. She shared the results of a survey she conducted and outlined her organizational pattern early on. The speech featured clear transitions, such as "First, let’s start with…," "Second…," and "Finally…." - Each point introduced was clearly discussed, with strong arguments and supporting evidence. - The speaker used statistics, studies, and scientific facts and cited sources. - To conclude, she included a quote and provided insightful commentary on it.
Idriss Cherki I did like the first speech. The speaker had a good posture and a good eye contact. She had a good introduction by mentioning all components such as thesis, thesis, and audience analysis questionnaire. All points were clear and supported by examples and sources. She also used good visuals of statistics and scientific facts.
The introduction was well organized, starting with an attention-grabber opener, followed by establishing the credibility, and an analysis questionnaire of the problem with a clear outline of her speech.
In the body, the speaker kept the strength of arguments with good transitions between points, moving smoothly from the problem to its causes and then to the solutions.
For the conclusion, she closed with a wise quote and a mindful reflection.
The delivery was good, the speaker had a good posture, maintaining eye contact with the audience, with clear articulation.
The first speaker always picks interesting topics: first he talks about fake meat, now he is arguing the origin of intelligence. the topic was good and controversial because I would have answered nature myself in the survey. I did change my mind after watching the speech. but, the only flaw I noticed is that there are lots of gap fillers.
the second topic wasn't that controversial in my opinion. I did not change my opinion about the topic after watching her speech. there were also some gap fillers but nothing too noticeable. aside from that, it was a good speech.
the third speech might be my favorite. the introduction story was quite unique and was perfectly linked to the topic of the speech. I was already agreeing with the speaker at the beginning of the speech, but I can see why this would be a controversial topic. People would think that creative people are only a few that are born this way. He had a good conversational style, good eye contact and didn't read from his notes.
I liked the first speech, it was very persuasive and the speaker kept a good eye contact
RépondreSupprimerIn my opinion, the second speech was better because the speaker maintained good eye contact, and a clear structure which made it easy to understand. She seemed interested in the topic also.
RépondreSupprimerPersonally, I think that the speaker in the second video talks using a conversational style and a fluid language
RépondreSupprimerDjibril (3rd speech) had a very nice accent. It was the first I heard about the subject, it was very interesting to learn how he grew. IT's very different than the usual moroccan. Very good eye contact too.
RépondreSupprimerThe most important thing that was respected in the three speeches is the selection of organizational pattern and following it perfectly. The speakers use a lot of skills we learned at class such as eye contact, intonation, posture, and especially the presence of transition moving from a point to another. Good job delivering the great content of the speech.
RépondreSupprimerRochdi Ghita
I think that the first speech had the best content, the speaker was raising his voice and he kept a good eye contact with the audience also.
RépondreSupprimerI enjoyed listening to the first speech since the speaker was clear, had a good eye contact and used visuals to back up his speech.
RépondreSupprimerGood use of visuals in the first speech and a good delivery as well. I enjoyed watching the speech.
RépondreSupprimerthe three speeches were good , the speakers followed well the organizational patterns. but I do prefer the second speech , the speaker kept a good eye contact , her voice was good . I really enjoyed watching her speech .
RépondreSupprimerThe third speech was very good in terms of following a structure ( problem, cause, solution), also in terms of the attention grabber. However, it lacked credibility alongside the arguments given which make them less convincing.
RépondreSupprimerMaria EZZIANI -SP21 COM 1301 07-
RépondreSupprimerThe introduction was well-structered with the use of an attention grabber, establishing credibility, audience analysis questionnaire, and the speaker clearly stated her position and the plan of problem,causes,solutions that she used.
For the body, the structure was clear using transitions from a point to the other, from the problem to its causes and to its solutions. Also, the speaker stated the different sources used explicitly.
For the conclusion, the speaker ended by a quote and by a reflection that leaves an impact on the audience.
Regarding the delivery, the speaker maintained a good posture all along the speech, she kept aye contact with her audience, spoke clearly, and looked confident. Moreover, she repected the time limit that she was allocated. A small thing to address, is the use of writing in the visuals, but averall it was a good job.
HASNAE BAGHDADI
RépondreSupprimerThe second speaker had a good delivery. She maintained eye-contact throught the whole speech. However, although she had a good voice tone, she used a lot of uhs which was a little bit disturbing. As far as the content is concerned, it's very well sructured since she used a good attention grabber, referred to her audience-analysis questionnaire and also mentionned at the beginning of her speech that she will be using the problem-cause-solution order. Overall, the speaker showed that she was very interested in the topic and conviced us about her point of view by using strong arguments.
Hibat Allah Manar
RépondreSupprimerI think that the first speech is very good; the speaker used visuals, had a good intonation, posture, and maintained eye contact. He also stated his position clearly in his introduction besides, he used a good attention grabber.
Hibat Allah Manar
RépondreSupprimerI think that the first speech is very good; the speaker used visuals, had a good intonation, posture, and maintained eye contact. He also stated his position clearly in his introduction besides, he used a good attention grabber.
Hibat Allah Manar
RépondreSupprimerI think that the first speech is very good; the speaker used visuals, had a good intonation, posture, and maintained eye contact. He also stated his position clearly in his introduction besides, he used a good attention grabber.
Hibat Allah Manar
RépondreSupprimerI think that the first speech is very good; the speaker used visuals, had a good intonation, posture, and maintained eye contact. He also stated his position clearly in his introduction besides, he used a good attention grabber.
Manal Mayssan
RépondreSupprimerThe second speech was well structured and followed a good outline. In the introduction, the speaker shared a story as an attention grabber, she established credibility and refered to the audience analysis questionnaire. In the body, she used visuals and different sources to back up her argments and make them more persuasive. However, the visuals used could have been better as some contained writing only. The speaker's delivery was very good as she maintained good posture and eye contat throughout the speech and looked confident from start to finish.
Souhail Marnaoui
RépondreSupprimerpersonally I preferred the 3rd speech, not only for its structure but also in terms of content, it is about a subject which I was not familiar with, the presenter respected all the instructions related to the speech (attention grabber, the use of visuals etc).
he had a good posture and maintained a good eye contact, but the negative aspect is his voice which has remained monotonous throughout the speech.
overall the speech was decent, good work!
NABIL HAMIDI
RépondreSupprimer- First, I think that the attention grabber was not that attractive because there is simply a displacement concerning the elements of the introduction. Framing it otherwise, the wrong elements (Questionnaire Analysis, Hook) were placed in the wrong place.
-Second, the gap failures that you use just as "ahhh" are not sign of a bad delivery. But if you extend the music of it, you will fall in the mistake of disrupting the attention of your audience. In contrary, using time-cutters or time-disruptors like "coughing" is not suitable for a good presentation. I would rather change my trajectory, or ask rhetorical questions the time for me to get back my idea.
-Third, your conclusion was as bad as your first introduction, and that would affect both the first impression and the last impression that the audience have on you. So people should be careful!
RépondreSupprimerIKRAM EL MORTAJI.
The three speeches were great, but I preferred more the third. It is easy to follow with him since the speech is well structured. However, so don’t think that he established credibility very well. Also the tone was not that good, but the posture and eye contact were great.
RépondreSupprimerThe second speech was very well structured and respected the time limit. The speaker maintained good eye contact and looked confident throughout the whole speech. The speaker used an example as an attention grabber. The speaker used evidence to back up her arguments which makes the speech even more persuasive. The speech is well structured and has strong arguments that can persuade the audience.
RépondreSupprimerHIBA FARIHI SP21-Section 08
I really enjoyed listening to the first speech owing to many reasons.
First of all, the delivery, he kept eye contact with his audience, good posture, he could easily grab the attention of his audience. The time of the delivery was also good and you don't get bored.
Secondly, the structure, we can easily differentiate between the introduction, body and conclusion. He also used his audience analysis questionnaire in a good way and he used an attention grabber at the beginning. Moreover, he used a lot of statistics to keep up with his speech.
Lastly, the speaker had strong arguments to support his speech and convince the audience.
Even though the first speaker had a very good speech, maintained eye contact and raised his voice, i prefer the second speech. she talked about a very interesting topic and she seemed very interested about prisoners' rights. she also was speaking as if it was a conversation so it was very nice to listen to.
RépondreSupprimer-Ghita Amrani
SupprimerSpeech 1: His speech was very well organized and his topic was very interesting. He used an attention grabber and mentioned the audience analysis questionnaire. His visual aids were well selected too. However, his voice was monotone and he way went way over the allotted time (2 minutes over). All in all, it was a good speech, although it lacked a bit in delivery.
RépondreSupprimerEL MEHDI EL BOUSTANI
RépondreSupprimerSP21 - Section 08
Speech3:
The speech is very well structured, which makes it easier for the audience to follow. Also, the speaker had a good posture throughout the whole speech, he was also engaging the audience by maintaining a good eye contact. He also gave a hint about his organizational pattern at the level of the introduction (problem, cause, solution), and he included visuals in his speech. However, I think that it lacks credibility since the arguments are not convincing.
Overall, a good speech with a good delivery. Well done!
RIDOUANI MAJDOULINE
RépondreSupprimerSPEECH 1:
In my opinion, the first speech is great; the speaker choosed an interesting topic, the introduction was well-structured; as the speaker stated his position clearly, used the audience analysis questionnaire, an attention grabber, establishing credibility…
the speaker used visuals, kept eye contact with the audience, respected the time, his body language is good: he looks confident. In addition, the speech contains great arguments and the ideas were well structured and organized.
MANAL HABBARI
RépondreSupprimerThe topic was very interesting, there was an attention grabber at the beginning which helped in making his speech interesting to the audience. His delivery was good, sometimes he was uncomfortable, but he was able to get rid of the stress, his posture was also good.
Chaima Nasroallah:
RépondreSupprimerIn the second speech, the speaker had a well structered introdution, she used an attention graber, refered to the sources, and she mentionned her audience analysis quetionnair. Concerning the body, it was clear the pattern used is problem, cause, solution, and all the sources wew mentionned as well.
For the delivery, it was good. She maintaned eye contact with everyone, and her voice tone was perfect.
DOUAE ESSALHI -SP21 COM 1301 08-
RépondreSupprimerThe speech is very good!
For me it is an A+ introduction because the speaker did an attention grabber, she also refers to her audience analysis questioannaire, she established credibility, and finally she stated her position clearly and guided the audience about the organization of the speech.
She respected the requirements of the persuasive speech and did great job to persuade the readers because she also included emotions in her speech as well as using strong arguments to defend her position!
As for the delivery, the speaker kept a good posture all along the speech. She maintained eye contact with the audience, she did not give her back to the audience to show them the visuals; she was professional! plus, she was confident and soke clearly.
as for the time, (5:45) was not enough. She should have added two sentences for example to respect the time limit.
I really liked the speech.
Douae Kabelma section 08
RépondreSupprimerPersuasive speech 1
The speaker's organizational pattern was a bit confusing (he revealed his thesis twice)
He also used a lot of "uuh" to gather his thoughts, which quickly got distracting. However, the topic was pretty interesting, his posture was good, and he managed to keep good eye contact. Finally, he had good control over his speech's direction and visuals but he went over the time limit (7:07).
Abdelghafour ABDOU
RépondreSupprimerThe speaker in the second speech was excellent because she maintained consistent eye contact, good posture, and a calm demeanor. The speech followed a good outline and had a simple and clear structure. The speaker drew attention with an example, backed up her points with facts and statistics from various sources, used visuals, stuck to the time limit, established credibility, and referred to to the audience analysis questionnaire.
YASMINE EL BACHIRI
RépondreSupprimer(speech 2)
The introduction of the speech included a story as an attention grabber. The speaker also established credibility and mentioned the result of her audience analysis questionnaire in percentages.In addition to that, she clearly stated that the points that she was going to address in the body.She also clearly stated her position.
In the body, the speaker used examples and sources that were relevant to what she was saying; she also stated them clearly. Besides that, the body was clearly structured and the speaker used transition words/sentences like (Firstly, secondly and finally) which helped the audience keep up.
The conclusion was very good as it restated her stand and left an impact on the audience.
The speaker had good posture with no big movements that would distract the audience.Her tone was also good as it wasn't monotonous and helped the audience not get bored. So, overall, the delivery was good.
The speaker also used good visuals, although they contained quite a bit of writing. It would've been preferable to use less writing.
She seemed convinced of her stand and genuinely interested in the topic which made the speech interesting.
I believe that the first speech was very intersting. The topic was good and it was well-structered. I like the fact that he had used many visuals and that he mentionned the result of the question analysis questionnaire. The delievery was quite good. I think that he was not confident enough. It could be in my opinion better.
RépondreSupprimerInass BENJAMA
RépondreSupprimerSpeech 1
The introduction of the speech was good. The position, organizational pattern were clearly stated and the speaker referred to his audience analysis questionnaire and established credibility. However, an effort could have been made to have a more attractive hook.
Regarding the body, there were tranisitions between the different parts which were logically following each other. However, few references were made to outside sources. He used effective visuals to support his sayings and inserted blank slides so that the audience could focus on what he had to say.
Overall, the delivery was good, he maintained eye contact with the whole room, he had good body language but his voice could have been a little bit less monotonous.
The timing was a bit too long (7:02)
Joumana laala
RépondreSupprimerFor me, the second speech was really interesting. Especially the introduction because the speaker grabbed the audience's attention by a nice attention graber( a story), referred to her audience analysis questionnaire, built credibility, and finally stated her stance clearly and directed the audience through the speech's structure.
The deliverer was also good at presenting the body since She followed the criteria of the persuasive speech and did an excellent job at persuading the audience since she used emotions, as well as solid arguments based on resources and examples to base off her topic and to support her position. Not forgeting that the speaker used some methods such the transition to make the speech seem much smoother and empty of holes.
The speaker was good at maintaning an organisational pattern to make her speech seem organized, clear and easy to keep up with.
She finally finished by a nice conclusion where she kept her composure, and tried to leave a sense of responsibility towards the audience, and that to make them persuaded more by hey topic.
As for when it comes to the delivery, the speaker was great, since she did maintain an eye contact with audience, also she had a great posture. What i also noticed that her gestures were well-stuctured since she kept moving, and she didn't turn to explain the visuals she posted to explain her arguments. This only makes her appear as a great deliverer and showed so much credibility in her topic.
MOHAMED TAHA DAOUDI
RépondreSupprimerSpeech 2.
The second speech was persuasive. In the introduction, the speaker shred a personal story about her childhood, a story that is related to the topic of her speech. The speaker also gave a detailed audience analysis questionnaire along with presenting the plan or the structure of her persuasive speech.
In the body of the speech, the speaker followed a problem/solution structure. She used statistics and she referred to studies from reliable institutions.
The delivery of the speech was good overall, the posture was right, the speaker maintained eye contact with the audience throughout the speech, and the tone of her speech perfectly matched the topic of the speech. The speaker also used visuals; However, i don't find them to be powerful following the theme of the speech (prison).
Ali Zahidi
RépondreSupprimerPersonally, I think that the first speech was well structured, the speaker got the audience attention, the topic was very interesting even if I'm not agree with him on some points. the delivery was good, i felt that he controlled the succession of his argument very well.
Speech 2:
RépondreSupprimerI found that the speech was well delivered. The speaker started with a good attention grabber, mentioned sources, referred to her audience analysis questionnaire and had a clearly stated position about the matter. The pattern used in her speech was very clear; problem cause solution and used strong arguments to develop her point along with some visuals. Her delivery was also very good, she kept a good posture, made eye contact with her audience and respected the time limit.
AYA FARKACHA
RépondreSupprimerThe second speech was delivered in a good way and was very well structured. She used an attention grabber in the form of questions that tell a story. She mentioned the audience analysis questionnaire and that she used the problem-cause-solution method in her speech. She clearly showed her position and there wasn't any confusion about it. Also, there were visuals that helped in proving her point. As a speaker, she spoke clearly, kept eye contact with her audience, and had a good posture.
AYA FARKACHA
RépondreSupprimerThe second speech was delivered in a good way and was very well structured. She used an attention grabber in the form of questions that tell a story. She mentioned the audience analysis questionnaire and that she used the problem-cause-solution method in her speech. She clearly showed her position and there wasn't any confusion about it. Also, there were visuals that helped in proving her point. As a speaker, she spoke clearly, kept eye contact with her audience, and had a good posture.
MARWA BAMOUSS
RépondreSupprimerSpeech 1
The introduction is well structured. However, the speaker could have used a better attention grabber. He mentioned the audience analysis questionaire, which proves that his topic is good. Throughout the speech, the speaker made many pauses and kept looking for his words, which personally made it harder for me to follow. He kept making eye contacts with the audience, looking at all directions and not only one, which is a good thing. Besides, we can notice the the speech is more than 7min long, which exceeds the time limit. Overall, the topic was very interesting and the visuals used made it more engaging. However, the delievery could be improved.
Ahmed El Fezazi
RépondreSupprimerI really enjoyed the second speech for many reasons. First of all, the introduction was good since she used a good attention grabber and she established credibility. In the body of the speech she gave some very interesting points and used visuals which is good. I also liked that had a good posture and she seemed very confident doing her presentation.
Souha Makboul
RépondreSupprimerFor the first speech. The speaker had a good attention grabber and he presented his topic well as well as referring to his audience questionnaire. His ci matched the content of the speech.
For the body. He used good transitions between paragraphs , his arguments were well constructed with proof to convince his audience. As for his presentation it was good he managed to keep eye contact with his audience.Overall, it was a well delivered speech.
RIDOUANI MAJDOULINE
RépondreSupprimerSecond speech:
In general, the three speeches are good; but I prefered the second one.
In the second speech, the speaker had a well structered introdution, as she used an attention graber. In the body, she used a problem-solution method and mentionned the audience analysis quetionnaire.
Furthermore, the delivery, it was good. She maintaned eye contact with everyone, her voice tone was excellent, and her english accent is perfect.
Ali Ouedghiri Saidi
RépondreSupprimerCOM 1301 07
I found that the speech was well delivered,the speaker referred to his audience analysis questionnaire and established credibility.
but his outline was confusing at first. he maintained consistent eye contact, good posture,
the visual aids were a good plus to his speech.
Ce commentaire a été supprimé par l'auteur.
RépondreSupprimerIn general, the three speeches are good but I prefer the second one. The speaker had a well structered introdution, she used an attention graber. The delivery in general was good. She maintaned eye contact with everyone and her voice tone was excellent.
RépondreSupprimerRegarding persuasive speech #2
RépondreSupprimerI liked the content and the idea, the way it is presented, and the visuals, I can't deny also that the attention grabber did its job and it wad excellent idea and brave to say, in the other hand, the posture wasn't good enough and the tongue really could got her into the monotony, overall the speech is very good and well structured, A range in my opinion
Section 4: second speech peer review : The persuasive speech had a strong start and a compelling ending, and it was organized nicely. In order to strengthen their point, the speaker employed powerful rhetorical techniques like repetition, emotional appeals, and logical reasoning. To further support the claim, the evidence may, however, have been more extensive and varied. To strengthen the argument, the speaker may have also mentioned probable objections and answered them. Overall, the speaker did a good job of delivering the speech, and he or she showed a great command of persuasive strategies, although it would have benefited from more research and arguments.
RépondreSupprimerAya ziane
SupprimerSection 11
The speech was engaging and demonstrated a clear structure, with an introduction that captured attention and a conclusion that left a lasting impression. The speaker utilized relatable examples and straightforward explanations to present the topic effectively. To elevate the impact, incorporating a broader range of supporting evidence or additional data would have strengthened the speech’s credibility. Moreover, addressing potential counterpoints or common misconceptions could have added depth to the argument. Overall, the speaker delivered a confident and well-prepared presentation, though it could benefit from further research and a more diverse range of supporting material.
Mohamed Réda Sabile
RépondreSupprimerWhat I liked:
The speaker was very convincing and maintained good eye contact with the audience.
The speech was good structurally: it had a good introduction, a detailed body, and, well, a thoughtful conclusion.
The visuals supported the message, and the hook from the very beginning made this a presentation all ears and captivating.
The speaker was very confident throughout the presentation; she used statistics to good effect.
• Areas for Development:
The speaker's delivery was so monotonic, which at times made it less interesting.
The talk took longer than the time available, which may have made the audience less interested.
On the whole, this is a well-structured speech that hits hard. It would have been better with more vocal dynamism and control of time.
Ce commentaire a été supprimé par l'auteur.
SupprimerThe speaker in the second speech delivered an excellent presentation by maintaining consistent eye contact, demonstrating good posture, and exuding a calm demeanor. Her speech was well-organized, following a clear and simple outline. She engaged the audience with a compelling example, supported her arguments with facts and statistics from diverse sources, utilized visuals effectively, adhered to the time limit, established credibility, and thoughtfully incorporated insights from the audience analysis questionnaire.
RépondreSupprimerThe most notable aspect of the three speeches was the careful selection of an organizational pattern and following it seamlessly. The speakers demonstrated many skills we learned in class, such as eye contact, intonation, posture, and particularly the use of effective transitions when moving from one point to another. Great job delivering the content in such an engaging manner!
RépondreSupprimerThe first speech stood out for its excellent use of visuals and strong delivery, making it enjoyable to watch. The speaker effectively used visuals, maintained good posture, and made consistent eye contact. Additionally, they employed a clear attention grabber and stated their position clearly in the introduction, which enhanced the overall impact of the speech. Well done!
Name: Mohamed Amine El Malki
RépondreSupprimerSection: 11
The most remarkable feature of the three speeches was the deliberate choice of an organizational structure and the seamless adherence to it. The speakers showcased various skills we discussed in class, including maintaining eye contact, using intonation effectively, demonstrating good posture, and especially incorporating smooth transitions between points. Well done on presenting the content in such an engaging way!
The first speech particularly stood out due to its exceptional use of visuals and strong delivery, making it highly enjoyable to watch. The speaker skillfully integrated visuals, maintained proper posture, and established consistent eye contact. Furthermore, they opened with a compelling attention grabber and clearly stated their position in the introduction, which significantly enhanced the overall impact of the speech.
The second speech was impressive, especially the introduction. The speaker grabbed attention with a story, mentioned her audience analysis, built trust, and clearly shared her stance and plan for the speech.
RépondreSupprimerIn the main part, she did a great job using emotions, strong evidence, and examples to support her message. Smooth transitions made the speech flow well and easy to follow. Her conclusion was strong and encouraged the audience to feel responsible, making her message more convincing.
Her delivery was excellent. She kept eye contact, stood confidently, and used clear, meaningful gestures. She didn’t rely too much on visuals, which made her seem confident and credible.
The three speeches were impressive because they followed a clear structure and stayed on track. The speakers used skills we learned in class, like making eye contact, using good intonation, having strong posture, and especially making smooth transitions between points. Great work delivering the content!
RépondreSupprimerOne thought the first speech was exceptionally well delivered for a few reasons. The speaker's delivery skills were great, such as maintaining good eye contact with an excellent posture and confident self-image. The speech was properly timed. Each speech did not feel dragged or rushed. The audience members were engaged throughout, either individually or in groups. Introduction, body, and conclusion was presented clearly. It appeared that the speaker had performed a very good job regarding audience analysis, filled out his questionnaire well, had an excellent attention grabber to begin, established good credibility early on, supported points with visuals, statistics, and good argumentation for a persuasive speech. Generally speaking, this was a very clear speech: well-organized, in addition, key presentation skills such as transition and intonation were highly appropriate.
RépondreSupprimerCe commentaire a été supprimé par l'auteur.
RépondreSupprimerRIM GRIOU
RépondreSupprimerSECTION 12
-The first speech was excellent. The speaker effectively utilized visuals, displayed good intonation, maintained proper posture, and engaged the audience with consistent eye contact. He clearly expressed his stance right from the introduction and began with an interesting attention grabber.
-The second speech was well-organized and followed a clear outline. In the introduction, the speaker used a story as an attention-grabber, established her credibility, and referenced the audience analysis questionnaire. In the body, she incorporated visuals and various sources to support her arguments and enhance their persuasiveness. However, some visuals could have been improved, as they consisted only of text. The speaker's delivery was impressive; she maintained good posture, consistent eye contact, and exuded confidence throughout the speech.
Speech 2 stood out as particularly engaging and impactful. The introduction was especially effective because the speaker immediately captured the audience's attention with an engaging and relatable story. This storytelling approach served as a strong attention-grabber, making the audience interested from the very beginning. Additionally, the speaker demonstrated an excellent understanding of her audience by referencing their feedback from the audience analysis questionnaire. This personalized touch not only made the audience feel included but also showcased her preparedness. Furthermore, she built credibility early on by establishing her expertise and connection to the topic, which enhanced her authority. Finally, she clearly stated her position on the topic and provided a roadmap of the speech structure, ensuring the audience could easily follow her main points.
RépondreSupprimerThe speaker's delivery of the body of the speech was equally impressive. She adhered to the principles of a persuasive speech, effectively combining emotional appeals with logical arguments. By incorporating well-researched evidence, concrete examples, and credible sources, she was able to strengthen her position and convince the audience of her viewpoint. The speaker also skillfully used transitions between points, creating a smooth flow that made the speech cohesive and easy to follow. These transitions eliminated any sense of abruptness, ensuring the speech felt polished and complete. Her use of an organized structure further added to the clarity, making her arguments accessible and straightforward for the audience to understand.
The conclusion of the speech was another highlight. The speaker maintained her composure throughout and ended with a strong, impactful closing. Her conclusion not only summarized the main points effectively but also left the audience with a sense of responsibility and motivation to take action. By appealing to the audience's sense of duty, she reinforced her persuasive message, leaving a lasting impression.
When it comes to delivery, the speaker excelled in several areas. Her consistent eye contact with the audience conveyed confidence and engagement, ensuring that she connected with everyone in the room. She also maintained a confident and professional posture, which added to her overall credibility as a speaker. Her gestures were purposeful and well-coordinated, enhancing the delivery without appearing excessive or distracting. What stood out was her ability to use visuals effectively; she referred to them seamlessly without turning away from the audience or losing their attention. This demonstrated her thorough preparation and her ability to integrate supporting materials naturally into her speech.
Overall, the speaker's strong delivery, well-structured arguments, and persuasive techniques made her presentation exceptionally effective. She showed not only her skill as a public speaker but also her ability to engage, inform, and inspire her audience.
The third speech was very impressive because of how well it was organized and delivered. The speaker used smooth transitions, which made the speech flow nicely and easy to follow. They kept good eye contact with the audience, stood confidently with great posture, and used simple but effective gestures to keep everyone’s attention. What made the speech even better was the introduction. The speaker started with an interesting attention-grabber that pulled the audience in right away. Then, they clearly explained their position, so everyone understood the main idea of the speech from the start.
RépondreSupprimerMalak Anouar
SupprimerPersonally , I find the second speech more persuasive engaging and impactful since she has a good eye contact using a fluent English . Moreover , she clearly explained her position and outlined her main points, making the speech easy to follow. In the main part of the speech, the speaker was very persuasive. She used emotional and logical arguments, supported by strong evidence and examples.
In conclusion , the speaker’s clear organization, confident delivery, and persuasive approach made her presentation more interesting .
Maroua Moujahid
RépondreSupprimerSECTION 11
The three speeches were truly impressive, mainly because of their clear and well-organized structure, which the speakers followed with ease. They showcased several skills we’ve discussed in class, like maintaining eye contact, using the right intonation, standing with confidence, and transitioning smoothly between points. These elements made their delivery both captivating and engaging.
The first speech, in particular, stood out for its incredible use of visuals and confident presentation style. The speaker integrated visual aids seamlessly, held strong eye contact with the audience, and maintained excellent posture throughout. They started with a powerful attention-grabber that instantly drew everyone in and clearly articulated their position, making the speech impactful. On top of that, they referred to the audience analysis questionnaire, tying it into their content.
In the body of their speech, transitions were smooth, their points were well-organized, and they backed their arguments with solid evidence. All of this came together to create a compelling and well-delivered presentation.
The first speech was the best. The speaker made good use of graphics, had good pitch in the voice, had a correct posture, and kept eye contact with the audience throughout the speech. He stated his opinions without any ambiguity as early as the introduction and used a good hook.
RépondreSupprimerThe second speech was easy to understand and had a good structure, which means it had introductions, arguments, and conclusions. In the introduction, the speaker began with an anecdote, introduced herself and her background, and mentioned the audience analysis questionnaire that was conducted earlier on the attendees. In the body, she provided pictures, several references, and various forms of tables to reinforce the arguments made, and make them more convincing. Nonetheless, there was possibility of some of the visuals to have been made more colorful, as some contained only texts. The speaker employed appropriate non-verbal communication; she stood tall, kept her gaze steady on the audience, and did not appear nervous at all.
1st speech was outstanding because of the great use of visuals and the confidence of the speaker. The speaker delivered the visual aids smoothly, had great eye contact, and stood tall and confident. They started with a great opening that caught everyone's attention and made their message crystal clear, which made the speech very effective. They also related their content to the audience analysis questionnaire, which was nice.
RépondreSupprimerTransitions were smooth, and points were well-organized in the body of their speech, where the evidence used was strong to back up the delivered idea. All of which made their presentation clear, convincing, and well-delivered.
all the speeches were clear and well-organized. Speakers demonstrated several qualities, including keeping eye contact, utilizing appropriate tone, standing confidently, and flowing effectively between points. These qualities made their delivery intriguing and engaging.
RépondreSupprimerIn the first speech,the speaker used visuals and had a confident delivery style. The speaker smoothly integrated visual aids, made strong eye contact with the audience, and maintained good posture throughout. Also in the introduction, the attention-grabber was lear and good enough, making the speech memorable. Furthermore, there is a reference to the audience analysis question.In addition to that the body was well organized
FIRST SPEECH
RépondreSupprimerOverall, the first speech was really good. It was well organized and structured ,with a clear position and good use of visuals to emphasize the message. The speaker is establishing rapport and connection with the audience by mentioning the questionnaire and by using good eye contact and confident body language. The transitions between points were smooth, and the arguments were well-structured and persuasive. The voice, however, could be little less monotonous, and timing was on slightly over (7:02). More references to sources outside the text would further enhance the content. Despite these minor points the speech was very engaging and the hook used at the beginning was good also
SECOND SPEECH
the second speech was Very well structured and easy to follow. The speaker started with an interesting story to gather the audience attention, the introduction was clear and she referred to the audience questionnaire which connected the speaker with the audience. She supported her speech with visuals, references and examples which made her arguments persuasive. However, some visuals could have been more meaningful, as some were simply texts .
She delivered it confidently and impressively. She maintained eye contact, good posture and spoke in fluent English all the way through the speech. The use of emotional and logical arguments, along with smooth transitions, made her points easy to understand and impactful. The conclusion tied everything together effectively, leaving a lasting impression on the audience. Overall, the second speech was persuasive, engaging, and well-delivered.
RépondreSupprimerThe first speech stood out as the best. It was well-organized, with smooth transitions and a strong hook that captured the audience’s attention early on. The speaker used visuals effectively, aligning them seamlessly with the message. Their confident posture, steady eye contact, and rapport with the audience—enhanced by referencing the audience analysis questionnaire—made the delivery engaging and impactful. The arguments were clear and persuasive, and the introduction stated the position unambiguously. However, the tone could have been less monotonous, and including more external references would have further strengthened the content. Despite these minor areas for improvement, the speech was highly effective and memorable.
The second speech was clear, well-structured, and easy to follow. The speaker started with an engaging anecdote and tied it to the audience analysis questionnaire, creating a strong connection with the listeners. Visual aids, references, and examples supported the arguments effectively, although some visuals could have been more dynamic and colorful. The speaker’s confident delivery, fluent English, and appropriate non-verbal communication, including good posture and steady eye contact, made the speech impressive. Emotional and logical appeals were skillfully used, and the smooth transitions between points added to the clarity and impact. The conclusion was strong, leaving a lasting impression on the audience. Overall, it was a persuasive and well-delivered presentation.
Djibril's speech was interesting, with a nice accent and good eye contact. But I think the second speaker was better. She used simple language, had clear ideas, and looked interested in the topic. Both were good, but the second was easier to follow.
RépondreSupprimerThe second speech was well-organized and followed a clear outline. The introduction effectively captured attention with a story, established the speaker's credibility, and referenced the audience analysis questionnaire. In the body, the speaker incorporated visuals and multiple sources to support her arguments and enhance their persuasiveness. However, some visuals could have been improved, as they primarily consisted of text. The delivery was impressive, with the speaker maintaining excellent posture, strong eye contact, and a confident position throughout the presentation.
RépondreSupprimerFirst Speech:
RépondreSupprimerThe first speech was the best. It was well-organized, with clear transitions and a strong opening that grabbed the audience’s attention right away. The speaker used visuals effectively, matching them perfectly with their message. They had a confident posture, steady eye contact, and built a connection with the audience by using insights from the audience analysis questionnaire. Their arguments were clear, and the introduction clearly stated their main point. However, the speaker’s tone could have been more lively, and adding more external sources would have made the content stronger. Despite these small improvements, the speech was engaging and memorable.
Second Speech:
The second speech was clear, well-organized, and easy to follow. The speaker started with a relatable story and linked it to the audience analysis questionnaire, which helped connect with the listeners. Visual aids and examples supported the arguments, though some visuals could have been more colorful and engaging. The speaker’s confident delivery, fluent English, and good body language—like steady eye contact and good posture—made the speech impressive. They used both emotional and logical points effectively, and smooth transitions helped make the speech impactful. The conclusion was strong and left a lasting impression. Overall, it was a persuasive and well-presented speech.
meryem akessabe
RépondreSupprimersection 10
.The first speech was the best. It was well-organized with smooth transitions and a strong opening that grabbed the audience’s attention right away. The speaker used visuals well, matching them perfectly with the message. They had a confident posture, made steady eye contact, and connected with the audience by referring to the audience questionnaire. The arguments were clear and convincing, and the introduction clearly explained the speaker’s position. However, the speaker’s tone was a bit flat, and adding more outside references could have made the speech even stronger. Overall, it was a very effective and memorable speech, with only a few small areas for improvement.
.The second speech was good and there was readability of the structure of the speech. The speaker asked questions to capture the audience’s attention, then he narrated an instance. She informed the audience of the usage of the audience questionnaire, the method which they used was the problem-cause-solution method. About her message, there could be no doubt: her position was stated with great clarity. She also employed figures and graphics to help get her points across. As a speaker, she enunciated her words, looked at the audience, and sat/stand, or moved in a proper posture.
.The third speech was organized according to the problem-cause-solution plan and had an acceptable and engaging opening statement. I personally liked the fact that the speaker has chosen his topic, as it was the first time I heard about it. I liked that he could explain about his upbringing and how he was raised, and it felt like he had a pretty nontraditional Moroccan upbringing. He had a proper British English dialect, a clean diction, and was able to look at the audience most of the time. I found that the speech is not credible enough because numerous arguments brought into speech are rather weak and are supported by insufficient evidence. This speech could have benefited from more basic reliable fact(s) added/referenced in order to support it. Regardless of this, ease of delivery and the topic chosen made it fun to listen to the particular broadcast.
-The first speech was very good, organized from a structural point of view and the main idea of the speech was stated very good at the beginning. The speaker kept his back straight, meet our eyes, and interact with the audience often sufficiently. Overall, visuals were used easily and effectively within this message. It was useful for the speaker to establish the relation with the audience by using the data from the audience analysis questionnaire, while their reasons where well-reasoned and convincing. As much as it could have been a more dynamic tone, incorporating more outside references would have benefited the speech further, still, it was very captivating and quite inspiring in general.
RépondreSupprimer- In the second speech, every point that was made was comprehensible and easy to follow. The speaker began by telling a personal story, and it not only meant that everyone in the audience was listening and engaged but was also important for gaining their attention. She incorporated good visuals and she supported all her arguments with facts and statistics However some visuals could be colored and more related to the subject matter.
The speaker was very prepared and poised in her speech, she had a good posture and was looking at the audiance most of the time. I think the transitions between the arguments were nicely done, and the closing was powerful.
- The third speech was well-organized, following a problem-cause-solution structure, and had an engaging opening. he speaker used smooth transitions, which made the speech flow nicely and easy to follow. However, I felt the speech lacked some credibility, as several arguments were weak and not supported by enough evidence. But in general the speaker's delivery was smooth, and the topic was enjoyable to listen to.
The first speaker established credibility and had a good posture and eye contact with the audience. He used visuals to elaborate more on his topic which is good.
SupprimerThe second speech was well-structured and easy to follow. The speaker began with an engaging story that successfully captured the audience's attention. The introduction was clear, and she referenced the audience questionnaire, creating a strong connection with her listeners. She supported her speech with visuals, references, and examples, making her arguments compelling.
Speech 1: This speech was strong in terms of delivery. The speaker maintained eye contact in the whole presentation with the audience and had good vocal volume. He used visual aids in a good way to support his arguments, and at the same time he kept a good posture throughout. While the content was well researched and included statistics and graphs, the speech is too long (7:02 minutes). If this speech is from your class, it surpasses the time limit of 6 minutes. Also, the second thing that I didn't like is that the speaker used too many filler words like "mm."
RépondreSupprimerSpeech 2: It was well-structured and engaging but not like the first one, employing a conversational style and a clear problem-cause-solution structure that made the content accessible for any person. The presentation began with a personal story that is the best attention-grabber if it is done in a good way, and throughout the speech, the speaker consistently referenced many credible sources. The speaker, like the first presentation, did use many "gap fillers" more than the first speech, such as “uhm” and "uh." Although the visual aids enhanced understanding, the slides contained too much text, which could distract from the speaker, and it is a bad practice, especially in public speaking class. But what I really did like or feel was that the speaker is passionate about the topic of prisoners' rights, so it increased the speech's persuasiveness, which resulted in an exceptional speech.
Omar Taheri 145981
The second speech stood out because the speaker's conversational style, fluid language, strong eye contact, and clear structure made it engaging and easy to follow, while her genuine interest in the topic added authenticity and connection.
RépondreSupprimer- Imane Aqqua 144955 (section 11)
The second speech was structured effectively and followed a clear outline. The introduction successfully grabbed attention with a story, built the speaker’s credibility, and referenced the audience analysis questionnaire. In the body, the speaker used visuals and multiple sources to strengthen her arguments and make them more convincing. However, some visuals could have been better, as they were mostly text-based. The delivery was outstanding, with the speaker demonstrating excellent posture, maintaining strong eye contact, and presenting with confidence throughout.
RépondreSupprimerRania Azdad (section 11)
Speech 1 :
RépondreSupprimerThe speaker's speech was well put together, and the topic was really engaging. He started with a good attention-grabber and even talked about the audience analysis. His visuals worked well with his message.
On the flip side, his voice was pretty monotone, which made it less exciting, and he went over the time by a couple of minutes.
Speech 2 : The speaker started off with a story that really grabbed everyone's attention. She made sure to show she knew her stuff and even shared some percentages from a questionnaire she gave the audience.
On top of that, she laid out what she'd be talking about and made her stance super clear.
In the main part of the speech, she used examples and sources that made sense and backed up her points. The speech was well organized, and she used transitions like "firstly," "secondly," and "finally," so it was easy to follow.Her ending was strong she repeated her main point and left the audience with something to think about. Her delivery was great! She stood confidently without moving too much, and her tone was lively enough to keep people interested.The visuals she used were helpful, but they had a bit too much writing. Cutting down on the text would've made them better.
Siham Bouzeriouh 147828 , (section 11)
Mohammed reda Chaali
RépondreSupprimerSpeech 1 :has a well-structured introduction, though a stronger attention grabber could have been used. The mention of the audience analysis questionnaire highlighted the relevance of the topic. However, the speaker frequently paused and searched for words, which made it harder to follow. On the positive side, the speaker maintained good eye contact, addressing the entire audience rather than focusing on just one direction. Unfortunately, the speech exceeded the time limit, lasting over 7 minutes. Overall, the topic was engaging, and the visuals enhanced the presentation, but the delivery needs improvement.
The first speech ; A good topic presented by the speaker , including the use of visuals, establishing credibility (research has been done) and the audience analysis questionnaire has also been mentioned. In terms of the speaker delivery; eye contact was maintained throughout the speech. However he didn't use much the conversational style as he maintained a monotone voice and used a lot of gap fillers. But overall, Good speech.
RépondreSupprimerAmrani Abderrahmane 147705
I believe the first speech was excellent. The speaker selected a captivating topic, and the introduction was well-organized, with a clear stance on the subject. The use of an audience analysis questionnaire, along with an engaging opening and effective credibility building, contributed to the overall impact. The speaker effectively incorporated visuals, and maintained eye contact. His body language was confident, adding to the delivery. Moreover, the speech presented strong arguments, and the ideas flowed logically and coherently.
RépondreSupprimerThe speech of the second speaker was very strong, as She kept eye contact during the entire speech. Her tone was good, however she used verbal pauses like uh many times, which was a little disturbing. As she started with an effective attention graber, refered to the opinion of her audience ,and clarified the fact that she will be using the problem cause solution order, the content of the speech was extremely well structured. Overall, the speaker demonstrated her deep interest and investment in the topic and used strong and logical arguments to persuade us.
RépondreSupprimerAmal Jebbouri, COM1301 10
RépondreSupprimerIn my opinion, I like the three speeches. The first one was outstanding, because the speaker kept a good eye contact with the audience while using a good introduction as he used the attention grabber and he talked about the audience analysis which made his speech very persuasive.
The second speech was very effective, clearly outlined, easy to follow, and hence appealing. The introduction caught attention by the personal story told, established the speaker's credibility, and referred to the questionnaire over audience analysis. In the speech, the speaker supported her arguments with visuals and used multiple sources to make the facts and statistics sound more convincing. This could have been even more effective if the color or content of the visuals were not merely words but more related to the subject matter. The delivery was great; considering her posture, eye-to-eye contact, and confidence, it was brilliant in keeping the audience tuned in. Transitions between arguments were smooth, and the closing was powerful. Her tone was good, though the deep interest in the subject was apparent; there were some verbal pauses like "uh," which slightly distracted from her speech. She had prepared well, argued logically, and had a clear problem-cause-solution structure that made her speech persuasive and effective.
The first speech and the chosen topic were very interesting; in addition, to the slides. But, he was a bit anxious which was reflected on his body language and by using many gap fillers. The second speech was good as well with a good tone levels and delivery
RépondreSupprimerCe commentaire a été supprimé par l'auteur.
RépondreSupprimerThe third speech had a strong structure, making it easy to follow. The speaker clearly outlined the problem, its causes, and the proposed solution, which helped guide the audience through the message. The opening was engaging and immediately grabbed attention, setting a positive tone for the rest of the speech.
RépondreSupprimerHowever, the main drawback was that some of the arguments lacked sufficient evidence. While the ideas were interesting, they weren't always backed up by enough facts or data to make them fully convincing. Adding more solid evidence or real-world examples would have strengthened the speech and made the points more credible.
In terms of delivery, the speaker did a good job of maintaining a steady pace and keeping the audience engaged. However, the tone of the voice was a bit flat at times, which made parts of the speech feel less dynamic. Varying the tone and adding more emphasis in certain places could have helped bring more energy and engagement to the speech.
Sarah Chermat 146487:
RépondreSupprimerI really liked the second speaker's speech.
-The speaker has a good tone and we can hear her clearly.
-She maintained eye contact with the audience.
-She didn’t use notes.
-She had a nice hook: a personal story.
-She introduced her topic smoothly.
-She established credibility by saying that she conducted research.
-She used visuals throughout the speech.
-She mentioned the results of the survey she conducted.
-She mentioned her organizational pattern in the introduction.
-She used transitions: First, let’s start by…, second…., Finally…
-She discussed each point mentioned in the introduction clearly. And gave good arguments to support her statements.
-She used statistics, studies, and scientific facts.
-She mentioned sources: Michigan law school….
-She used a quote in the conclusion and commented on it.
Lina Fares
RépondreSupprimerCOM130112
The first speech was well-structured and engaging, with clear organization (problem, cause, solution), good posture, eye contact, and visuals. However, the arguments lacked credibility and were unconvincing, though overall, the delivery was solid.
The second speech was confident and persuasive, with strong eye contact, an example as an attention grabber, and evidence-backed arguments. It stayed within the time limit and effectively captured the audience's attention.
Both speeches had clear structure and good delivery, but the second stood out for its strong arguments and persuasiveness, while the first was enjoyable but less convincing.
Speech 2 stood out as a compelling and well-executed presentation. The introduction was particularly effective, with the speaker captivating the audience right away through a relatable personal story. This narrative approach not only engaged listeners but also created a strong emotional connection, setting the stage for the rest of the speech. The speaker further established credibility and demonstrated an excellent understanding of her audience by referencing feedback from the audience analysis questionnaire. This personalized touch showcased her preparation and helped establish a rapport with her listeners. Additionally, she clearly outlined her position and provided a clear structure, making it easy for the audience to follow along.The body of the speech was equally impressive. The speaker used a well-rounded combination of emotional and logical appeals, supported by credible evidence and concrete examples. Transitions between points were smooth, allowing the ideas to flow naturally and making the content cohesive and engaging. Her structured approach ensured that the audience remained focused and connected to the message.The conclusion tied everything together seamlessly. The speaker ended on a powerful note, summarizing her main points effectively while leaving the audience with a thought-provoking takeaway.In terms of delivery, the speaker demonstrated confidence and professionalism. Her consistent eye contact created a sense of connection with the audience, while her confident posture and purposeful gestures enhanced her credibility. The visuals could have been slightly more dynamic or visually striking to elevate the overall presentation further.Overall, Speech 2 was a standout performance. With its engaging introduction, persuasive arguments, and polished delivery, the speaker successfully informed and inspired her audience.
RépondreSupprimerSpeech 1 demonstrated a solid foundation, with the speaker showcasing strong delivery skills and a clear structure. The introduction effectively captured the audience’s attention, and the speaker skillfully incorporated data from the audience analysis questionnaire to establish credibility. His use of visuals was seamless, complementing the content and enhancing understanding. Additionally, the speaker maintained good posture and consistent eye contact, projecting confidence and engaging the audience throughout.
RépondreSupprimerThe speech was well-organized and supported by relevant statistics and visuals, making the arguments convincing and easy to follow. The speaker’s content was engaging, and the topic was both well-researched and relatable. However, a few areas left room for improvement. The delivery, while clear, lacked variation in tone. A more dynamic vocal expression could have added energy and kept the audience more engaged. Additionally, the frequent use of filler words detracted slightly from the overall polish of the presentation.
Another notable issue was the speech’s length. At over seven minutes, it exceeded the class time limit of six minutes, which may have affected its pacing and impact. Refining the content to fit the allocated time would have made the speech more focused and impactful.
Overall, Speech 1 was a compelling and informative presentation, strengthened by its structure, visuals, and audience connection. With more attention to vocal variety and adherence to time constraints, it could have been even more engaging and effective.
Rayan Alaoui Ismaili, COM1301 10
RépondreSupprimerI personally like all three speeches. The first one was really amazing since the speaker kept a good eye contact with the audience. He also had a great introduction where he used an attention grabber, mentioned the audience analysis which made his speech more credible and persuasive.
The second speech was clear, well outlined, and appealing. There was a strong attention grabber where the speaker used a personal story that established credibility. He also referred to the audience analysis. The speaker also had strong arguments supported by visuals and multiple sources making her argument more convincing and credible. Additionally, the delivery was great, I didn't feel bored. Also, the transitions between each argument were very smooth. Overall, the speech was well prepared, well argued and well presented.
RépondreSupprimerThe first one followed the problem-cause-solution, well structured. About the delivery, good tone, posture, eye contact and good visuals. the speaker established creadibility with the audience analysis and, the used sources. It was a dynamic speech and convincing
The second speech had a good structure. About the introduction i found very interesting the shorts story as attention grabber. The speaker established creadibility and mentioned the questionaire.Visuals were used for the speech (some had text) and the arguments were based on the used resources. Good delivery(posture and eye contact). It was a dynamic speech.
The most important thing that was respected in the speeches is the selection of organizational pattern and following it perfectly. The speakers use a lot of skills we learned at class such as eye contact, intonation, posture, and especially the presence of transition moving from a point to another. Good job delivering the great content of the speech.
RépondreSupprimerBahaeddine Jifer
RépondreSupprimerThe first speech was well structured. We could easily follow the speaker throughout the speech. He also used visuals which helped us understand the topic and his position. The speaker demonstrated clear understanding of the topic. His posture was also very good, his eye contact was great, and his intonation and voice were adequate.
The second speech was also very good. Her visuals were nice, which helped us follow the speaker throughout the speech. Her intonation and voice were great too. Her posture was good too, it showed her confidence. Finally, she kept eye contact during the whole speech.
The first speech is structured well as the speaker followed problem-cause-solution. The topic is very interesting. The introduction clearly states the main topic. The speaker used visuals, had good posture, and maintained eye contact. He had a good attention grabber and made credibility by mentioning the audience analysis questionnaire. The body is well strcutured with each point being explained well. However, the speaker's tone could've been better and more dynamic. Also, he could've avoided using filler words. Overall, the speech is very good, and I believe it does a good job at persuading listeners.
RépondreSupprimerThe second speech was also well-organized and had a very good outline. In her introduction, the speaker had an attention-grabbing story, credibility, and a reference to the questionnaire for audience analysis. Her body used visuals and sources to back up her argument to make them more convincing. In some, visuals used were not appropriate because there was only writing on them. She gave her speech quite well: she had good posture, good eye contact, and since the beginning, she had looked confident.
RépondreSupprimerHiba Ezzahir (2nd speech)
RépondreSupprimer- The speaker had a clear and engaging tone, making it easy for the audience to hear her.
- She maintained good eye contact throughout her speech and spoke without relying on notes.
- Her introduction included a personal story, which served as an effective hook.
- She smoothly introduced her topic and established credibility by mentioning her research.
- Visual aids were used consistently throughout the presentation. She shared the results of a survey she conducted and outlined her organizational pattern early on. The speech featured clear transitions, such as "First, let’s start with…," "Second…," and "Finally…."
- Each point introduced was clearly discussed, with strong arguments and supporting evidence.
- The speaker used statistics, studies, and scientific facts and cited sources.
- To conclude, she included a quote and provided insightful commentary on it.
Idriss Cherki
RépondreSupprimerI did like the first speech. The speaker had a good posture and a good eye contact. She had a good introduction by mentioning all components such as thesis, thesis, and audience analysis questionnaire. All points were clear and supported by examples and sources. She also used good visuals of statistics and scientific facts.
I think the second speech was good because the speaker had good eye contact and a clear structure, which helped me to understand her idea easily.
RépondreSupprimerThe introduction was well organized, starting with an attention-grabber opener, followed by establishing the credibility, and an analysis questionnaire of the problem with a clear outline of her speech.
RépondreSupprimerIn the body, the speaker kept the strength of arguments with good transitions between points, moving smoothly from the problem to its causes and then to the solutions.
For the conclusion, she closed with a wise quote and a mindful reflection.
The delivery was good, the speaker had a good posture, maintaining eye contact with the audience, with clear articulation.
The first speaker always picks interesting topics: first he talks about fake meat, now he is arguing the origin of intelligence. the topic was good and controversial because I would have answered nature myself in the survey. I did change my mind after watching the speech. but, the only flaw I noticed is that there are lots of gap fillers.
RépondreSupprimerthe second topic wasn't that controversial in my opinion. I did not change my opinion about the topic after watching her speech. there were also some gap fillers but nothing too noticeable. aside from that, it was a good speech.
the third speech might be my favorite. the introduction story was quite unique and was perfectly linked to the topic of the speech. I was already agreeing with the speaker at the beginning of the speech, but I can see why this would be a controversial topic. People would think that creative people are only a few that are born this way. He had a good conversational style, good eye contact and didn't read from his notes.